I'm sitting in a cafe and have this exact article from yesterday's The Seattle Times tree-killer edition sitting next to the laptop.
This is not about women's rights, abortion, professional responsibility, moral values, or religious beliefs.
It's about being stupid.
Suing because you don't want to administer plan B? And you're a pharmacist? Like I have said before, I personally think the correct response is "you're fired," but read this single sentence and tell me what I'm missing:
Some critics consider the pill related to abortion, although it is different from the abortion pill RU-486 and
has no effect on women who already are pregnant.
(Oh, I guess I need to say, emphasis mine.)
Maybe if we let these fundy pharmacists label the pills, "you had sex with the full intention of enjoying yourself rather than making a baby, you naughty naughty girl, here's a painful period to PUNISH you" pill, that would satisfy their "deeply held religious and moral beliefs". I doubt it.
I gotta say this too: as much as I admire a great many feminist blogs, this ain't one. I simply cast my net wider, is all.
Searching this blog for the word "misogynist" brings up a blank. Until now.
You pharmacists are not being anti-abortion. You're being phucking misogynists. Find another profession.
My father was a pharmacist for only 53 years. In all that time he thought of himself only as a conduit between the doctor and the patient. It wasn't his job to second guess or supercede.
ReplyDeleteHe also thought that turning people away was bad for business and sooner or later that's what will really put a stop to all of this.
It's easy to be Puritanical and restrictive like this so long as it doesn't effect you personally.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how many pharmacists would deny the morning after pill to their own daughters or to female members of their close family.
I have some pretty strongly held viewpoints about this issue due to close personal female friends I've had over the years who have gone ahead with pregnancy, opted to keep the child, and then subconsciously resented his/her presence in their lives. I think, in a very moral sense, a child has a right to be born to a parent who wanted to have him/her.
I've heard comments like:
1. "I can't help but resent (insert child's name here) because he looks so much like his Father."
2. "Choosing to keep my child forced me to grow up much more quickly than I would have liked and deprived me of the freedom I think I deserved as a young adult."
As far as career changes go, I'm sure these guys could find work selling burqas in Afghanistan. From what I hear, it's a growth market right now...
ReplyDeleteThis isn't a feminist blog?
ReplyDeleteBAC
You GO girl!
ReplyDeleteOh, and I'm with BAC. Not a feminist blog? You embody the word in the best possible way.
BAC and Karen: You honor me. I just hold myself up next to Pam's House Blend and pale in comparison, is all.
ReplyDeleteBG, don't sell yourself short! Karen is correct in saying "you embody the word in the best possible way." No need for comparisons.
ReplyDeleteBAC
Seems to me this is one of those "freedom" issues that you blue-staters tend to want to defend...oh, unless it's freedom against something you believe in.
ReplyDeleteWhy shouldn't a pharmacy be allowed the freedom to sell, or not sell, a product? Another poster said it best by saying, "...turning people away was bad for business and sooner or later that's what will really put a stop to all of this." Let the free market determine whether or not a pharmacy should sell a product or not. But let's not take away their freedom to choose!
This is all about people's freedom, not about the moral aspects of plan B.
The freedom comes in when a person decides to take on a responsibility to the public by becoming a pharmacist. After that, they have a responsibility to do their job.
ReplyDelete